Comparative Analysis of the military rule of
Ayub Khan and Yahya khan
▪️ Military rule is a temporary rule imposed by military over a civilian government, usually
during emergencies like war,rebellion, or natural disasters.
▪️Under military rule normal laws may be suspended, civil rights may be restricted, media
and public expression are controlled, and leaders justify their rule as necessary for stability
and security.
▪️In 1958, the first military rule imposed on Pakistan by overthrowing president Iskandar
Mirza.
Ayub Khan's Military rule
▪️ The background of Ayub Khan's military rule is rooted in political instability, economic
crisis and power struggles within Pakistan after its independence in 1947.
▪️ Ayub Khan remained in power for a decade from 1958 to 1969 untill mass protests.
▪️Ayub khan introduced the basic democracy.
▪️ Ayub Khan fall from power in 1969.
Yahya Khan's Military rule
▪️Yahya Khan taken power after Ayub Khan fall from the power in 1969.
▪️His power lasted form 1969 to 1971.
▪️Yahya khan centralized power,suspended the constitution and dissolved
the National assembly.
▪️He failed to handle the political crisis as it led to the break up of the
country.
Ayub Khan’s Military Rule
(1958–1969)
Introduction
Ayub Khan imposed martial law on October 7, 1958.
•• Became Pakistan’s first military ruler after removing Iskander Mirza.
Political Changes
•• 1958: Martial Law – Banned political parties.
•• 1962: New Constitution – Presidential system.
Economic and Social Reforms
•• 'Decade of Development' – Economic growth and industrialization.
•• Built major projects: Mangla & Tarbela Dams.
•• Indus Water Treaty (1960) – Water-sharing agreement with India
Foreign Policy & War
•• Close ties with USA – Joined SEATO & CENTO alliances.
•• 1965 Indo-Pak War – Launched Operation Gibraltar.
•• Tashkent Agreement (1966) – Unpopular peace deal.
Fall of Ayub Khan
•• 1968: Mass protests due to economic inequality and political repression.
•• Agartala Conspiracy Case – Sheikh Mujib’s trial increased tensions.
•• March 1969: Resigned, handing power to Yahya Khan.
Conclusion
•• Ayub Khan’s rule was a mix of economic success and political oppression.
•• His failure to address grievances, especially in East Pakistan, led to protests.
•• His resignation paved the way for further instability in Pakistan.
Yahya Khan’s Military Rule
Accession to Power (1969)
•- Yahya Khan took power from Ayub Khan amid protests
•- Declared Martial Law, promising elections
•- Aimed to restore democracy but deepened political unrest
From Power to Downfall
•- 1970 Elections: Awami League won in East Pakistan, but power was not transferred
•- March 1971: Launched Operation Searchlight—brutal military crackdown
•- December 1971: Bangladesh Liberation War, India intervened, Pakistan surrendered
End of Yahya Khan’s Rule & Creation of Bangladesh
•- Pakistan Lost East Pakistan → Bangladesh was born
•- Yahya Khan resigned in disgrace (1971), replaced by Bhutto
•- Marked as one of the most disastrous rulers in Pakistan’s history
Comparison of Ayub Khan &
Yahya Khan
Ayub Khan vs. Yahya Khan: A Comparative Analysis
🐱Leadership Style:
Ayub Khan: Focused on modernization and economic growth.
Yahya Khan: Weak leadership, political instability, and military suppression
.
🐱 Economic Policies:
Ayub: Industrial growth and Green Revolution (but regional inequality).
Yahya: Stagnation and no significant reforms.
Comparison of Ayub Khan & Yahya Khan
🐱 Handling of East Pakistan:
Ayub: Neglected East Pakistan, but avoided military intervention.
Yahya: Military crackdown (Operation Searchlight), leading to the Bangladesh Liberation War
.
🐱 Foreign Relations:
Ayub: Strengthened ties with US & China (SEATO, CENTO).
Yahya: Diplomatic failure, leading to international isolation after the Indo-Pak war.
Conclusion
Ayub Khan focused on economic growth but was marked by authoritarianism
and regional inequality. His foreign alliances helped, but his neglect of East
Pakistan led to unrest.
Yahya Khan’s leadership was characterized by weakness and a failed response
to the East Pakistan crisis, leading to the formation of Bangladesh.
Both leaders’ reigns show the dangers of military rule and the need for
democracy, regional inclusivity, and political stability for long-term unity.
